Wat makes a bullet a cannon? Like a 50 cal. And it's it the size of the bullet when thay start calling it a cannon.
There is a very specific size bore diameter that steps into the category of "destructive device". I'm not sure exactly what it is, but I believe it's around about .52 in a cartridge firing weapon. C3 would know, and I suspect he'll step in here shortly. My opinion? A cannon is something that uses loose or bagged black powder or gun cotton and has a bore diameter of at least one inch, or a shot weight of at least 3 pounds. That's opinion based though. Extra points if it's carriage or pintle mounted. I'll check with Mister Webster and see if there's an actual definition.
Well that simplifies it I guess... 1 plural usually cannon a : a large heavy gun usually mounted on a carriage b : a heavy-caliber automatic aircraft gun firing explosive shells And destructive device... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destructive_device
In aviation, cannon generally describes weapons firing bullets larger than 0.5 inches (12.7 mm) in diameter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannon
IIRC, destructive cdevices have a bore diameter over 1/2 inch. IOW, .50 cal is okay, .51 cal is destructive. Incredibly stupid definition, but what do you expect from liberals???
Cannon also fire cannister shot, (buckshot on steroids) sabot rounds and solids. Also, in military terminology, a "GUN" is a cannon. The weapon you shoot from you shoulder is a "rifle." If you've ever been to boot camp, you know a gun has wheels on it!
I consider any magnum round a hand cannon round. I just sold my desert eagle .44 magnum because it was a beast and just too damn heavy to be a good carry peice. I have a .44 magnum revolver that I love to shoot and it weighs considerably less than the DE. I consider the revolver a hand cannon as well.
It depends on what realm you are looking for a definition in. The military (at least ours) considers anything over .50" bore to be a cannon. The ATF does not define cannon, but rather uses "Destructive Device" for anything over .50 AND capable of firing an explosive projectile. 12 ga is about .75 but is primarily designed for shot. 37mm "M-203" look alikes shoot flares and smoke canisters. There are not any 37mm explosive projectiles today. The term cannon was originally applied to a specific size of artillery. It evolved to include all artillery and eventually large powerful firearms in general (a .44 magnum is a "hand cannon"). It has become a very loosly applied term with no specific definition (in common useage).
Thanks for the reminder. It has been 40+ years since BCT at Ft. Knox. I believe the initial post made reference to the .50 cal round. While .50 cal rifles have been issued in recent years, it's usually associated with the Browning M2, hardly a shoulder weapon.
Exactly, Terminology and word meaning change. Up until about WW1, "rifles" has barrels over 26 inches. 26 and shorter were called carbines, When I was in the military, you called your 1911 .45 a "sidearm." Any other term would result in 5 minutes of screaming from some senior NCO. Hey, Donn, I enlisted in 1961, when did you go in??
A "gun" in military terminology included cannon, howitzers, shotguns and machineguns. A rifle was a rifle, weapon, or piece. The 1911A1 was a sidearm or pistol (sidearms can include sabres) And Cannon has been adequately defined. The M203 is not a cannon, despite its bore diameter, since it is a Grenade Launcher.
Ahh yes! Cannon and Howitzers. There was a definite distinction until recent times. Interesting though, I never heard a machinegun called a "gun" and I never heard a sabre called a sidearm. (Of course, I was only in for 4 years, and I wore black shoes!)
